• Jilanico@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    28 days ago

    Exactly. This pic is comparing apples with oranges to get a rise out of us. There are irrefutable arguments for saving the planet, we don’t need this low IQ rage bait.

      • mike805@fosstodon.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        28 days ago

        @mondoman712 @Jilanico This is ironically due to the emissions rules. Bigger vehicles are classed as commercial and allowed to burn more gas and pollute more.

        My dad has a 1999 Chevy S-10 with a small cab, a 4-cylinder engine, and a long bed. Nothing like that is made today. Handy when you need to move stuff though.

        • mondoman712@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          28 days ago

          In the US, but worldwide car companies push consumers towards larger vehicles because they are more profitable.

      • qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        28 days ago

        Right — and I think that is a real issue that deserves real attention, and closing these bullshit carveouts for high GVWR vehicles should absolutely happen.

        That said, I take some issue with ragebaity posts when less ragebaity posts (such as the article you linked) are more informative, offer fair comparisons, and ultimately are more critical of the problem.

        Just my 2¢.

    • aleph@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      28 days ago

      Sedans were the default back in the 80s, now SUVs and pickups account for around 75% of all new sales (in the US, at least).

      So, in terms of what the average car looked like then versus now, it’s a perfectly valid comparison.